New Queensland MP to oppose same-sex civil unions

One of the new LNP MPs elected at the weekend was the former CEO of the Lutheran Church of Australia, Trevor Ruthenberg. One of the issues Mr Ruthenberg may have to deal with when parliament resumes is civil unions for gay and lesbian couples. Last November, the Queensland parliament gave same-sex couples the right to have legally recognised civil unions. It is the policy of the Liberal National Party to revoke that law, although the new premier says it is not a top priority, and he would not want to leave those couples who have already used the law to register their partnerships in 'legal limbo'. But Mr Ruthenberg is clear. He is against gay marriage and civil unions for same-sex couples, even if it means upsetting his best friend, who is gay. Trevor Ruthenberg talks about how God had inspired his decision to run for parliament.

Transcript

Andrew West: One of the new MPs elected at the weekend was the former CEO of the Lutheran Church of Australia Trevor Ruthenberg, and one of the issues Mr Ruthenberg may have to deal with when the parliament resumes is civil unions for gay and lesbian couples. Last November the Queensland parliament gave same sex couples the right to have legally recognised civil unions, but it’s the policy of the LNP to revoke that law, although the new premier says it’s not a top priority, and he says he would not want to leave those couples who’ve already used the law to register their partnerships in ‘legal limbo’. But Mr Ruthenberg is, as you’ll hear, quite clear. He’s against gay marriage and civil unions for same sex couples, even if it will mean letting down his best friend who’s gay. When I spoke to Trevor Ruthenberg I asked him if God had inspired his decision to run for Parliament.

Trevor Ruthenberg: Yes, in effect yes. I think that God’s in every part of our lives, and certainly as I looked around our country and saw what was going on from a political perspective, yes, I was somewhat disgruntled in the current process and the way that politics was unfolding that I guess I got to a point where my wife finally said, ‘Put up or shut up’, and so after some long consideration and certainly some prayer we determined that it was time to put up.

Andrew West: Do you consider being in parliament part of a public ministry?

Trevor Ruthenberg: I don’t know. I think that most of what I do I do from the perspective of trying to serve, or trying to do that which God has asked me to do, so I guess sitting in parliament from that perspective does come as a continuation of my understanding that I’m in the world but not of the world. In other words, I’m here to serve God’s people, and God’s people is everybody, it’s not just those who have a particular faith; our belief is that God created all, and created them in his image, and so therefore we’re here to serve everybody.

Andrew West: But I guess I’m asking, will you be a Christian witness in the parliament in Queensland?

Trevor Ruthenberg: I think my whole life is a Christian witness, and irrespective of the job I do, I certainly try and do that so that people would see the witness within me.

Andrew West: Prior to becoming an MP you were the chief executive of the Lutheran Church of Australia. Why are you a Lutheran?

Trevor Ruthenberg: Oh, wow. Why is the Pope Catholic?

Andrew West: Well, I think being the CEO of the Lutheran Church isn’t quite the same as being the Pope, but...

Trevor Ruthenberg: No, you’re right. Look, I think that the theology of the Lutheran Church, in my study, is something that I agree with and can accept. I like the attitude of our theology, I think that it accurately reflects the heart of God.

Andrew West: It’s a mainstream church, but it’s a small church in Australian terms. Within it there’s a lot of diversity. Where do you sit within the Lutheran theology?

Trevor Ruthenberg: I would say that I’m a conservative progressive, and that sounds like a contradiction in terms, almost an oxymoron, but in other words...

Andrew West: It does a bit, but go on, because I’m fascinated.

Trevor Ruthenberg: In other words I certainly believe that my interpretation or my understanding of scripture is somewhat conservative, but there are certainly elements within my understanding of scripture that are far more progressive, probably, than some of my conservative brethren. For example, I would certainly support the ordination of women, whereas the broader aspect of our church certainly wouldn’t understand or accept the ordination of women.

Andrew West: One of the issues in this election, and Bob Katter sought to make it a major issue, was the question of gay marriage and same sex unions. Where do you stand on that, and why weren’t you with Bob Katter’s party, for example?

Trevor Ruthenberg: You know what? That’s a really fair question. I don’t support gay marriage, I take my lead there from my faith. As I say, my interpretation of most of my faith would be considered to be somewhat conservative, but on the same token one of my best friends is a practicing homosexual and is always welcome in my house, and he knows that, and we have many long conversations together on this, and it’s one issue that we are different on, but I guess that’s what makes us mates. But he knows that I could never support gay marriage, while I maintain my current faith, and as much as I...You know what? It is going to sound strange. I almost ache at times for him and understand his pain. It’s one of those things where sometimes we don’t understand God’s wisdom, but nonetheless we have to abide by his word as we understand it.

So while I appreciate and accept that he has his own position and his own opinions, in this instance mine certainly runs along the line of most Christian churches, and that is that I don’t support gay marriage. Having said that, however, I said before that we’re all made in the image of God, and I think that dignity needs to be preserved, and human rights, and civil rights need to be preserved, and that guys like my mate need to be placed before God as all of us are placed before God, and that is within his image, and, yes, it’s a difficult subject for me, because we’re good friends, but nonetheless I take the position, that of my faith, which is that I just don’t...I can’t accept gay marriage because I believe that marriage was created for the purposes of a man and wife within the institution of the church.

Andrew West: When you say you can appreciate his pain, you’re talking about your friend’s pain in not being able to consummate his long term relationship with a marriage, or what are you talking about?

Trevor Ruthenberg: Yes, absolutely, absolutely, and, you know, he will often say to me, for example, ‘Look, Trev, you won’t give me the choice to get married’, and I say, ‘Well, that’s, actually, that’s right.’ But on the same token, as my brother, you know what, I need to make sure that his dignity is upheld and that his human and civil rights are maintained, and I actually think that current marriage law under the Federal Act maintains that quite adequately.

Andrew West: So, where do you stand on civil unions, then?

Trevor Ruthenberg: I think civil unions are awful close to gay marriage and I don’t support them, and I’ve been quite open on this in my electorate. I’ve had a lot of people talking to me about this.

Andrew West: One final point, Trevor. You’re not quite yet the most famous Lutheran elected to the Queensland parliament, that does belong to the former premier, the late Joh Bjelke-Peterson. He was a controversial figure. What do you, as a Lutheran, think of his legacy?

Trevor Ruthenberg: Let me declare first that Joh was my father’s Sunday school teacher, and so there’s a small connection there, but as a small church you understand we’ve got strong connections across the church. Look, Queensland lived on Joh’s legacy for years after he left. We had strong economy, we had lots of solid infrastructure in place, we had free hospital systems. I mean, was there corruption in his administration? Yes, I think there probably was, and the Fitzgerald Inquiry probably showed that, but you know something, I respect the heck out of Joh and I think what he put together was a strong government that lasted for years, and so yes I think Joh himself was a man of honour, and I think he tried to act in accordance with his faith, and I don’t think we should ever look backward but look forward and take the good things that happened and say, ‘You know what, we could certainly do a lot worse than leave a legacy similar to what Joh left.’

Andrew West: How high in politics would you like to go?

Trevor Ruthenberg: Wow, what a question. Right now I’d love to learn how to be an MP and be the best MP I could. Long term, given the opportunity, I think that probably depends a little bit on the opportunities that present at the time. I’ve approached this from a servant’s heart, I said that right at the start. I would love to serve them in whatever capacity that is, and I mean, I’ve lived all over the world, I have some pretty interesting experiences I think, as the opportunity presents and as our leadership sees fit I’ll serve exactly how that presents itself.

Andrew West: That’s Trevor Ruthenberg, the former head of the Lutheran Church of Australia and now a member of the Queensland parliament, and this is the Religion and Ethics Report and I’m Andrew West.

Guests

Mr Trevor Ruthenberg

New Liberal National Party MP for Kallangur, Parliament of Queensland; former Executive Officer, Lutheran Church of Australia

Credits

Producer

Noel Debien

Comments (13)

Steve Kozak :

28 Mar 2012 10:41:03pm

I heard Mr Ruthenberg talk about preserving the dignity of individuals. He also mentioned how his heart aches when he thinks about his gay friend. This sounded so disingenuous to me, I simply couldn't believe my ears. In wanting to repeal Queensland's Civil Partnership law, Mr Ruthenberg wants to relegate gays to second class status - no doubt that is where he believes God wants them to be. I say this to him, if he doesn't like civil partnerships, then don't have one! But allow others that right - that is human dignity.

John Steele :

29 Mar 2012 12:56:49am

Thank you for your interview with Mr Ruthenberg.

However, why was he not challenged over his arrant nonsense? He told us that he sincerely loves his mate Joe and even wants to “uphold his civil rights and dignity” but will deny him the right to marry. Apparently Joe’s “civil rights and dignity” are of a different order to his own. He claims “rights and dignity” for himself which he will not concede to others. Even by the usual shabby standards of the opponents to equality in marriage, his argument is so patently ridiculous. We used to selectively deny rights to slaves, women, the indigenous, denials all variously claiming scriptural justification at the time. Which part of the Enlightenment has by-passed Mr Ruthenberg?

And what is Mr Rutherburg’s grand justification for his position? That marriage is “an institution created for man and wife within the Church.” The stupidity of this is such that it is almost not worth refuting. I’ll have a go though. As far as we can establish, unions between men and woman (men and several women in many instances) have existed well before recorded history, far longer than the 2000 odd year existence of “the Church” to which Mr Rutherburg belongs. Here are a few more revelations for Mr Rutherberg. Even today marriages happen outside of “the Church”. They also happen in other faiths. Even pagans subject themselves to it. Additionally, in the West, the role of the clergy and the State in the affairs of men and women is a relatively “modern” interference. For the great unwashed, for the majority of our history, no blessing or marriage certificate (and the concomitant fees!) was deemed necessary or desirable. And remember, on a good day, even Luther desacramentalised marriage and placed it in the sphere of the secular.

With its roots in pre-history, interdependent relationships between men and women, monogamous or otherwise, are the adaptive response to our evolution. (I’ll just despair if another Creationist has been elected to public office!!!!) The newborn Homo sapien is the most vulnerable of all mammals, dependant for the longest period of time upon its mother. Survival demarcated that women and helpless children depended upon men, perhaps the fathers of the children, to provide for and defend them. The ability of the Homo sapiens to co-operate amongst one another is one of the keys to its survival. That’s about as “mystical” as the origins of “marriage” are. If it makes you feel better to think that Mr and Mrs Caveman were in love, so be it. Every civilisation has taken the opportunity overlayed this with its own myth and ritual. Christianity is the Johnny-come-lately here.

It has been a while since this state of affairs has prevailed. Women can well and truly look after themselves…….especially since they are no longer chattel and illegitimacy in children is now recognised as the absurdity it always was. The previously necessary nexus between men and women no longer ex

AJ :

02 Apr 2012 12:58:44am

His best friend? I don't think so. A casual acquaintance, at best, surely. Nobody could feasibly be anyone's best friend if they held such views contrary to the empowerment towards equality for that best friend's demographic.

Nathan Thomas :

02 Apr 2012 6:34:44am

I love how religious people you the bible to hide behind their prejudice. They cherry pick from the bible certain phrases to support their disdain for gay citizens.

Well if the bible is their guiding light do they support raped women having to marry their rapist as set out in the bible? Eating cray fish is an abomination. Women are to be stoned to death if they marry and are not a virgin.

The bible is full of versus that we all ignore.

They guy needs to open up his myopic view of the world and govern for everyone.

And some advice to his gay friend - you are worth do much more than hanging with people who really dispose you. Respect yourself and find some new friends who will love you unconditionally. There are accepting people eberywhere even religious ones.

Kristiana :

02 Apr 2012 8:55:20am

This politician does NOT represent me and my views nor the views of anyone I know. Homophobic legislation has no place in our beautifully diverse country. Civil unions are a reflection of basic human rights and are a reflection of smarter governance of a range of constituents in a secular country.

Felicity :

Jan :

02 Apr 2012 9:55:41am

Can I just make one valid point here that everyone seems to have overlooked. Civil unions were also bought in for HETEROSEXUAL couples as well at the same time. If you repeal civil union for same sex couples then you MUST also repeal them for heterosexual couples. If you do not you will be up for a class action of discrimination. Why can't you just let people live their lives and be happy. I am heterosexual and what other people do with their lives is no business of mine. I wouldn't want strangers coming into my life and telling me who I can or can't be with. It's disgusting that this is even an issue in 2012. Christians - you live your life the way you want to, so please let everyone else live their own lives as well without interference or judgement from you. I have alot of gay friends and they deserve to be treated with the same respect that you expect.

Shaz :

Brian Walton :

02 Apr 2012 4:00:53pm

I am a gay man, I have grown up in a world that does not except me,or so it feels, (although my family and friends do) It seems there is an underlying disgust for me and people like me. I was made in the gods image, if god does not want gays why did he/she create us? I follow all things good and I am honest and I am full of love, I am too scared to love so much so I have never had a relationship because the fear that it will be a joke in the eyes of the world. I am very sick and tired of people telling me who I am and what I do, when they don't even know my name and it is assumed that I am except and enjoy my second rate citizenship. I am having difficulty excepting who I am when the world tells me who I am not.